1996-07-23 - Re: take the pledge

Header Data

From: Ernest Hua <hua@chromatic.com>
To: perry@piermont.com
Message Hash: eb7f69d970ec13b9965fe1d330b0b8b5b4cc8e9d9456b2ee886f8dfad79d5838
Message ID: <199607231834.LAA11518@server1.chromatic.com>
Reply To: <199607191606.MAA04690@jekyll.piermont.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-07-23 22:47:18 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 06:47:18 +0800

Raw message

From: Ernest Hua <hua@chromatic.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 06:47:18 +0800
To: perry@piermont.com
Subject: Re: take the pledge
In-Reply-To: <199607191606.MAA04690@jekyll.piermont.com>
Message-ID: <199607231834.LAA11518@server1.chromatic.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



> Look, folks, we all know that 99% of what David Sternlight posts is
> garbage. Why don't we all pledge not to answer any of his posts, and
> then he'll go away. If necessary, someone can be appointed to post a
> weekly "the views expressed by David are junk and we are deliberately
> not replying to them directly" message.
>
> David has plenty of places to argue with the wind. We don't need to
> add this one.
>
> I'd like to ask people to publically pledge that they will not reply
> to David's messages. This is such a pledge.

One of the desirable results of free speech is that people get to
listen to ideas rather than credentials.  Some poor Joe from the
ghetos has just as much freedom to speak because he may have good
ideas.  Given that, ignoring someone is much worse than to
listening with reservations.

Ern







Thread